Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Richard F. Kahn
Collected Economic Essays
Richard F. Kahn
Edited by
Maria Cristina Marcuzzo · Paolo Paesani
Palgrave Studies in the History
of Economic Thought
Series Editors
Avi J. Cohen
Department of Economics
York University & University of Toronto
Toronto, ON, Canada
G. C. Harcourt
School of Economics
University of New South Wales
Sydney, NSW, Australia
Peter Kriesler
School of Economics
University of New South Wales
Sydney, NSW, Australia
Jan Toporowski
Economics Department
SOAS University of London
London, UK
Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought publishes contribu-
tions by leading scholars, illuminating key events, theories and individuals
that have had a lasting impact on the development of modern-day eco-
nomics. The topics covered include the development of economies, insti-
tutions and theories.
The series aims to highlight the academic importance of the history of
economic thought, linking it with wider discussions within economics and
society more generally. It contains a broad range of titles that illustrate the
breath of discussions – from influential economists and schools of thought,
through to historical and modern social trends and challenges – within the
discipline.
All books in the series undergo a single-blind peer review at both the
proposal and manuscript submission stages.
For further information on the series and to submit a proposal for con-
sideration, please contact the Wyndham Hacket Pain (Economics Editor)
wyndham.hacketpain@palgrave.com.
Editors
Maria Cristina Marcuzzo • Paolo Paesani
Richard F. Kahn
Collected Economic Essays
Editors
Maria Cristina Marcuzzo Paolo Paesani
Department of Statistical Sciences Department of Economics and Finance
Sapienza University of Rome University of Rome Tor Vergata
Rome, Italy Rome, Italy
We are grateful to Palgrave Macmillan, Wiley and The Royal Economic Society,
the American Economic Association, the Banca Commerciale Italiana, Europa
Publications for the Institute of Bankers, Allen and Unwin, Lloyds Bank Review,
and the Scottish Economic Society, for permission to republish these essays.
ISSN 2662-6578 ISSN 2662-6586 (electronic)
Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought
ISBN 978-3-030-98587-5 ISBN 978-3-030-98588-2 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98588-2
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Praise for Richard F. Kahn
“Richard Kahn is of great interest to historians of economics because of his role at
the centre of two of the central developments in economics in the 20th century:
imperfect competition and the Keynesian revolution. This collection, including an
important, previously unpublished paper from 1933, and the very helpful editorial
introduction successfully illustrate the evolution of Kahn’s thinking from the
1930s to the 1970s.”
—Roger E. Backhouse, University of Birmingham
and Erasmus University Rotterdam
“This valuable and fascinating collection documents Richard Kahn’s central role in
the imperfect competition and Keynesian revolutions in economics, making con-
veniently accessible his articles on imperfect competition, on Keynes, and on infla-
tion and unemployment, including a pathbreaking 1933 paper on imperfect
competition previously published only in Italian translation. The helpful and infor-
mative editorial introduction provides a useful guide to the nature and importance
of Kahn’s contributions. Every economist interested in the imperfect competition
and Keynesian revolutions should have this book.”
—Robert W. Dimand, Brock University
Contents
1 Introduction 1
Part II Keynes 85
vii
viii Contents
Index273
Sources
1. (1933). Unpublished.
2. (1937). Economic Journal, 47(185), 1–20.
3. (1952). Economic Journal, 62(245), 119–130.
4. (1985). In G. Harcourt (Ed.), Keynes and His Contemporaries
(pp. 42–51). London: Macmillan.
5. (1978). Journal of Economic Literature, 16(2), 544–559.
6. (1984). In R. F. Kahn, The Making of Keynes’s General Theory
(pp. 119–168). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. (1952) In Banking and Foreign Trade (pp. 1–18), Lectures delivered
at the Fifth International Banking Summer School, Oxford, July.
London: Europa Publications for the Institute of Bankers.
8. (1973). American Economic Review, 63(2), 181–188.
9. (1976). In A.P. Thirlwall (Ed.), Keynes and International Monetary
Relations (pp. 3–35). London: Macmillan.
10. (1976) In G.D.N. Worswick (Ed.), The Concept and Measurement of
Involuntary Unemployment (pp. 19–33). London: Allen and Unwin.
11. (1976). Lloyds Bank Review, 119, 1–11.
12. (1976). Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 33(1), 11–16.
ix
x Sources
The essays of this collection have been reproduced without alteration from
the original text, except for few minor corrections of typos and oversights.
Spelling, quotation marks, italics, underlines, punctuation and biblio-
graphic reference system have been left as they were in the sources, even if
inconsistent among t hemselves. Only notes have been always reproduced
as consecutively numbered footnotes within each essay.
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Our heartfelt thanks go to Iolanda Sanfilippo for her excellent editorial assistance
in preparing this collection of essays.
M. C. Marcuzzo (*)
Department of Statistical Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
e-mail: cristina.marcuzzo@uniroma1.it
P. Paesani
Department of Economics and Finance, University of Rome Tor Vergata,
Rome, Italy
e-mail: paolo.paesani@uniroma2.it
1
The essay was published in Italian in Kahn (1999) edited by M.C. Marcuzzo in which a
selection of Kahn’s papers were also translated. For an overall view of Kahn’s contribution,
see also Marcuzzo (2011).
1 INTRODUCTION 3
sectoral demand and supply factors in triggering inflation are all indicative
of the relevance of this approach.
A second aspect that makes Kahn’s thought topical is the reappraisal of
Keynes’s contribution to economic theory and policy, with regard both to
the employment-wage-price nexus and to the more general issue of uncer-
tainty as an obstacle to maintaining high living standards and full employ-
ment. Over the last fifteen years, the global economy has suffered very hard
blows, from the global financial crisis in 2007–2009 to the Covid-19 pan-
demic. Events of such magnitude compel economists and policymakers to
forge new models and new tools to deal with the far-reaching and often
unforeseen consequences of global shocks. In the current context of high
uncertainty, the name of Keynes is again resounding loud and clear thanks
to his approach to economic problems with its mixture of creativity, willing-
ness to experiment with new policy instruments and optimistic commitment.
Following in Keynes’s footsteps, but bringing his own personal views,
Kahn analysed international economic problems in the field of trade and
finance. The articles collected here obviously reflect the historical context
in which they were produced. Nonetheless, they are worth re-reading
today for their constructive spirit, more than fifty years after the end of the
Bretton Woods regime, whose origins Kahn recounts, and at a time when
the international economic institutions are struggling to maintain an
acceptable international economic order.
The economic and financial problems that many economies, at differ-
ent stages of economic development, face today are partly due to contin-
gent factors and partly to structural reasons. In this context, it is hardly
deniable that in many crucial sectors, including information technology,
distribution and finance, oligopoly and imperfect competition are the
norm rather than the exception. We start from this topic in our explora-
tion of Kahn’s thought.
23-year-old Kahn, who made it the focus of his first research activity. In
the academic year 1928–1929, Kahn had attended Sraffa’s lectures
(“Advanced Theory of Value”), in which the subject of market imperfec-
tion was addressed along very similar lines to the 1926 article.2 In the
same year Kahn took G. Shove’s course “Economic Theory”,3 a consider-
able part of which was devoted to “market imperfections”.
It is hardly surprising, therefore, that in the Preface to the Fellowship
Dissertation, which Kahn wrote between October 1928 and December
1929, there is ample recognition of these two economists. Nor is it sur-
prising that the Dissertation, because it remained unpublished for almost
fifty years4 and because of its title, The Economics of the Short Period, which
did not explicitly allude to market imperfection, did not fully reveal the
importance of Kahn’s contribution to the emergence of the theory of
imperfect competition.
In the established textbook tradition, it was the books by Joan Robinson
and E. Chamberlin that were indicated as the initiators of that line of
analysis. And even Joan Robinson, in spite of her close collaboration with
Kahn in writing The Economics of Imperfect Competition (Robinson [1933]
1969), did not get round to reading Kahn’s Dissertation until January
1933,5 when her book was in draft form. On the other hand, Kahn had
been in correspondence with Chamberlin, to whom he had sent the duo-
poly part of the dissertation for him to read it, since 1930.6 The discussion
with Kahn resumed in the days when The Economics of Monopolistic
2
Sraffa’s Lectures are in the Sraffa papers, Trinity College Library, Cambridge, and are
now available online (SRAF/D/2/1). We also have the notes taken by Kahn and his essays
written for the course in the Kahn papers, King’s College Library, henceforth given with the
catalogue reference number (RFK/3/3/359–84).
3
Of Shove’s course, we are left with the notes taken by John Saltmarch in his academic year
1928–1929. See in particular the section entitled “Partial or Conditional Monopoly”. For a
discussion of Shove’s role in the development of the theory of imperfect competition, see
Carabelli (2005).
4
The Dissertation was first published in Italian in 1983, with an Introduction by M. Dardi
(Kahn 1983), and then in English in 1989 (Kahn 1989).
5
See the letter from Joan Robinson (henceforth JVR) to Richard Kahn (henceforth RFK)
of 24.1.1933 (RFK papers, 13/90/1/75).
6
See E. Chamberlin’s letters to RFK of 3.8.1930 and 12.9.1930 in RFK papers,
1/13/19–25, and Chamberlin (1961, p. 513n).
1 INTRODUCTION 5
7
RFK to JVR, 9.2.1933 (RFK papers, 13/90/1/100): “I am having lunch with
Chamberlin, whose book on Monopolistic Competition is just about to come out, in fact in
two days”. JVR’s letter to RFK, dated 3.3.1933 (RFK papers, 13/90/1/169), is also inter-
esting, concerning the coincidence of the “discoveries” on imperfect competition in those
years: “Chamberlin’s book has turned up. Very competitively Monopolistic as Piero [Sraffa]
says. I find myself enjoying the coincidences without any base emotions, but I must not read
it thoroughly or the temptation to put in [i.e. in The Economics of Imperfect Competition]
footnotes will be too great.”
6 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
given by the equality of marginal cost and marginal revenue, was not for-
mulated in those terms, and the definition of marginal revenue was only
“discovered” in the late 1920s and early 1930s, by more than one author
working independently. Moreover, Marshall had not gone into much
depth in considering the effects of the behaviour of rival firms on the elas-
ticity of demand of a firm, or the effects of the pricing policy of a single
firm on the behaviour of rival firms. Despite Cournot’s and Edgeworth’s
work on duopoly, at the time of the writing of the Dissertation, a determi-
nate solution to the problem and its integration into a general analysis of
imperfect competition had yet to be arrived at.
Definition of marginal revenue is also absent from the Dissertation, but
there are two aspects of particular interest in comparison with the previous
literature on oligopolistic markets. The first is Kahn’s invention of a way
to measure the degree of market imperfection, under the assumption of
linearity of demand curves and average unit cost, through the “annihila-
tion coefficient” which is analytically identical to the measure that would
later become known as the “degree of monopoly” (Marcuzzo 1994).
The second aspect of interest is how the effect on the demand curves of
firms of a price change by one of them is taken into account. This is the
subject of a specific section in which Kahn also criticizes the conclusion
reached by Sraffa in his 1926 article, according to which in the case of
equilibrium in an imperfect market—i.e. in which there are many firms
each with its own individual market and hence a negatively sloped demand
curve for its product—the final equilibrium price is the one that would be
reached if the market were entirely controlled by a single monopolist.
Kahn’s position is argued on the basis of the idea that the slope of indi-
vidual demand curves reflects the assumptions each firm makes about the
behaviour of the others. Kahn shows that under any conjecture the rela-
tionship between individual and market demand curves is such that it
never gives equilibrium at the monopoly price, but at a lower price and
consequently at a larger quantity than would be chosen by a monopolist
under the same technical conditions (Kahn 1989, p. 117).
The point of contention between Kahn and Sraffa revolves around the
different way of conceiving the response of the competing firms in the
presence of a price increase by one of them (on this, see Marcuzzo 2001).
Kahn focuses on a subjective element, namely the conjectures that each
firm makes about what its competitors will do if it decides to raise its price.
Sraffa focuses on an objective element, the upward shift in the demand
curves of competing firms in the presence of a price increase by one of
them (substitution effect). According to Kahn, the fear of losing
1 INTRODUCTION 7
8
In the text reference is made to Robinson’s book under the title The Monopoly Analysis of
Value, which was only changed to the definitive one, The Economics of Imperfect Competition,
in January 1933. See JVR’s letter to RFK of 24.1.1933.
9
This unpublished book can be found in Kahn’s archives (RFK papers, 2/8–2/9). On this,
see also Marcuzzo and Rosselli (2008).
8 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
The article in question was developed from what was to be Ch. VII of
the unfinished book and it is certainly the product of discussions in what
they jokingly called “The Trumpington Street School”, named after the
street where Joan and Austin Robinson—returning from India in late
1928—made their home in Cambridge and where Kahn was a frequent
visitor.10 The discussions were certainly provoked by Sraffa’s critique of
Marshallian theory and also concerned the implications of Keynes’s
Treatise on Money, which was the subject of the “Circus” meetings, as we
shall see later.
Kahn sailed on the Majestic to the United States in December 1932,
taking with him this article which was to be a summary of some of those
discussions. Over the previous two years Kahn had been working inten-
sively with Joan Robinson on solutions to various problems that had arisen
during the drafting of the Economics of Imperfect Competition.11 The most
important analytical finding presented in this text—the equilibrium “dou-
ble condition” given by the point of tangency between the average reve-
nue and average cost curves and the point where marginal revenue meets
marginal cost—had already appeared in an article by Joan Robinson, “The
Diminishing Supply Price”, published in the Economic Journal of 1932
(Robinson 1932) and later incorporated into the book which was to
become known as “Kahn’s Theorem”.12
Kahn presented his article at several conferences in the United States
and gave it to Taussig for publication in the Quarterly Journal of Economics.
However, the article was not accepted. From Kahn’s correspondence,
which among other things offers a very interesting account of the situa-
tion in the country and aspects of American academic life, we know that
Kahn reacted with characteristic modesty, and made no further attempts
to publish it.13
10
It was about this article that JVR wrote to RFK, in a letter of 11.2.1933: “Austin
[Robinson], who has yet only just glanced at it, is very keen that it should be published as
the first manifesto of the Trumpington Street School. (After reading it he repeats this view)”
(see RFK papers, 13/90/116).
11
On the cooperation between Kahn and Robinson in drafting Robinson’s book, see
Rosselli (2005).
12
“The condition of tangency between the demand curve and the average-cost curve of a
profit-maximising firm that just breaks even, Schumpeter in his 1930s Harvard lectures used
to refer to as ‘Kahn’s Theorem’” (Samuelson 1994, p. 54n.).
13
RFK to JVR, 3.3.1933: “Taussig’s refusal of my article on ‘Imperfect Competition and
the Marginal Principle’ was conducted with great candour, which I did all I could to encour-
age”. (RFK papers, 13/90/43).
1 INTRODUCTION 9
14
J.M. Keynes (henceforth JMK) to RFK of 1.1.1935, in RFK papers, 13/57/122.
10 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
15
RFK to M. Kalecki, 10.7.1939 (RFK papers, 5/1/149–58) and 11.7.1939 (RFK papers,
5/1/159–162).
16
M. Kalecki to RFK, 9.6.1939 in RFK papers, 5/1/146. See also Osiatynski (1991,
p. 524).
17
R.F. Kahn to R. Marris, 2.5.1987 (in Marris 1991, p. 184).
1 INTRODUCTION 11
Kahn was the academic economist closest to Keynes from 1930 until
Keynes’ death in 1946. At first, as Kahn himself told us, he and three other
King’s students met Keynes once a fortnight for supervision. Soon Kahn
proved to be such an outstanding student that he elicited Keynes’ enthu-
siastic comments on the essays he wrote for supervision.
To give a few examples: in the margin of an essay by Kahn of 4 November
1927, Keynes wrote: “You are really good at economics” (RFK papers,
3/3); similarly on 27 April 1928: “Excellent—an almost perfect answer”
(RFK papers, 3/3). On one occasion, just before exams, Keynes wrote to
his wife: “Yesterday, my favourite pupil, Kahn, wrote the best answer I
have ever had from a student; he must absolutely get an A”.18
And indeed Kahn lived up to expectations, coming top (First Class) in
the 1928 Economics Tripos. But when it came to choosing the subject of
his thesis to compete for a Fellowship at King’s, Keynes suggested a topic
(involving the use of the Midland Bank’s monetary statistics) that proved
impractical (due to the Bank’s unwillingness to make them public). So
when Kahn, at the suggestion of Shove and Sraffa, proposed to deal with
“short run economics”, i.e. to explain how firms in a given industry
reacted in a depression, with analysis of the type of costs and the type of
market in which they operated, Keynes—apart from providing him with
the statistics of the cotton industry—did not show much interest in the
subject. But in fact, as Kahn wrote almost fifty years later, “my work on the
short run was then to influence the development of Keynes’ thought”
(Kahn 1989, p. 21). Collaboration with Keynes resumed only after Kahn
was elected a Fellow of King’s in March 1930, again arousing the enthu-
siasm of Keynes, who wrote in his congratulatory letter to Kahn: “the
18
JMK to Lydia, 28.4.1928, in JMK papers, PP/45/190.
12 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
19
JMK to RFK, 16.3.1930, in RFK papers, 13/57/3.
20
Among Kahn’s papers is an extract from the article, with a dedication to an unidentified
Elgar: “With the author’s heartful thanks for the cooperation and stimulus received in the
Tyrol, August 1930 and Surrey, March 1931” (RFK papers, 13/127).
21
Letter from RFK to R. Marris, 2.5.1987, in R. Marris 1991, p. 184: “Maynard derived
from me the idea of thinking in terms of the supply curves of capital goods and consumption
goods”. See also Kahn’s letter to D. Patinkin, 11.10.1978: “I claim I brought the theory of
value into the General Theory in the form of a concept of the supply curve as a whole and
that this was a major contribution” (Patinkin 1993, p. 659).
1 INTRODUCTION 13
himself later acknowledged, was that he had not clarified the fundamental
implication of the “multiplier”, i.e. the necessary equality of savings and
investment. Kahn attributed this difficulty to the fact that the article
moved within the definitions of savings and income in the Treatise on
Money; only after the “discovery” of the principle of effective demand did
it become clear that those particular definitions had to be abandoned
(Kahn 1984a, pp. 98–100).
In the article on the multiplier Kahn studies the effects of an increase in
investment on aggregate output in terms of the demand and supply of
consumer goods in aggregate under short-run conditions, which were the
appropriate conditions to evaluate the proposal, put forward by Keynes in
the pamphlet Can Lloyd George Do It? (Keynes [1929] 1972) to imple-
ment a public works policy to get out of the economic depression. If the
level of demand is high, the productive capacity will already be largely
utilized and its greater utilization will call for an increase in costs and
therefore in prices. But if the level of demand is low, plant and equipment
will be largely unused, so production can be increased without any appre-
ciable increase in unit costs and prices.
The crucial aspect is therefore the shape of the costs of enterprises in
the short term. We have seen that study of various types of costs and their
development was the focus of analysis in the Dissertation, where Kahn
assumed that the average cost curves were shaped like an inverted L. It is
natural, therefore, to suppose that Kahn, in writing his article on the mul-
tiplier, drew on his prior knowledge to identify the appropriate shape of
the cost curves needed to construct an aggregate supply curve for con-
sumer goods. However, in the article on the multiplier, although a wide
range within which costs are constant is mentioned, the assumption that
they are in the shape of an inverted L is no longer to be found. This was
probably influenced by Pigou’s criticism of the hypothesis in his Fellowship
Committee Report, which Kahn was able to read shortly afterwards: “I
think unfortunate that he should assign to [L-shaped supply curves], as he
does, a central place in his formal analysis” (RFK papers, 2/8).
The importance of the inverted L-shaped curves lay in the fact that, as
we have seen, they forced Kahn to introduce the hypothesis of imperfect
competition in his Dissertation. If, on the other hand, the hypothesis of
the shape of increasing cost curves is maintained, it is no longer necessary
to abandon the hypothesis of perfect competition.
14 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
22
For the maintenance of this hypothesis, Keynes is known to have attributed the respon-
sibility to Kahn (Keynes 1973a, pp. 399–400).
1 INTRODUCTION 15
I do not like you saying that saving and investment are “different names for
the same thing”. They are different things (that is the whole point)—they
are certainly different acts—but they are equal in magnitude. I still hold that
the simple-minded proof that saving = investment, appropriate for those
who cannot grapple, with user cost, etc. is called for—not only for the sake
of the simple-minded, but to prevent the obvious retort that all your stuff
depends on your peculiar definitions. What is wrong with saying that how-
ever income is defined,
Income = value of output = consumption + investment
also income = consumption + saving
∴ saving = investment
This truth is far too important (and far seldom recognised) to be con-
cealed in a mist of subtle definition.
23
On this correspondence see Marcuzzo 2005.
16 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
nor univocal and other forces must be considered, starting with nominal
wages as determinants of variable unit costs.
Kahn insists on the influence of contingent conditions in shaping
Keynes’ ideas on these issues, and indeed on the absence of a systematic
and satisfactory treatment of the behaviour of money wages in the General
Theory, where Keynes focuses on the reluctance of wages to fall in the
presence of high unemployment while questioning the idea that if wages
fell unemployment would be reabsorbed.
Moreover, the simplification of Keynes’s ideas, as in the neoclassical
synthesis, opens the way to the possibility of imagining a binary world in
which, if there is unemployment, wages do not change and if there is full
employment, any increase in aggregate demand has only inflationary con-
sequences. As we will see in greater detail below, Kahn firmly rejects this
view in favour of a more complex assessment in which, without ignoring
the possible inflationary effects of a sharp increase in aggregate demand,
inflation can be triggered by sectoral bottlenecks and/or distributional
and inter-union conflicts, even in the presence of high unemployment.
Kahn reiterates that full employment and stable prices are compatible with
one another, provided policymakers are prepared to use all the available
instruments including monetary, fiscal and income policy to foster the
appropriate coordination of economic agents’ decisions. This attitude is
typical of the Keynesian approach to policy problems at both the domestic
and international levels, as the writings collected in the third part of this
volume evidence.
depends on the level of nominal wages and the response of the trade
unions to the economic situation and government measures. For the
monetarists, on the other hand, the trade unions have little or nothing to
do with inflation, reduction of which requires a squeeze on the growth
rate of the money supply, driving unemployment above its natural level, a
concept whose soundness Kahn doubted.
It was Kahn’s and the Keynesian position not to dispute that persistent
inflation is concomitant with parallel increase in the money supply, believ-
ing that an increase in the money supply is a necessary condition and not
the cause of inflation, the main explanation for which remains the wage-
wage spiral. Several factors can exacerbate this spiral. They include a low
rate of growth in productivity and living standards, ineffective centralized
wage negotiations, and short-sightedness on the part of the trade unions
in failing to see the long-term benefits of wage moderation, as Kahn dis-
cusses in “Thoughts on the Behaviour of Wages and Monetarism” (1976d,
Chap. 12 in this volume). From this perspective, the key to containing
inflation and maintaining high employment is to reform wage bargaining
and a strong commitment by the State to public investment and pro-
grammes to encourage worker mobility and training and improve relations
between the social partners within companies.
The reversal in the hegemony of Keynesian thought coincides with the
time when the western economies were being hit by levels of inflation
unprecedented in the post-war period, and the Cambridge School of eco-
nomics was gradually falling out of grace. Kahn’s retirement in 1972, one
year after Joan Robinson, his replacement by Frank Hahn on the Chair of
Economics and the failure to appoint lecturers in the Keynesian tradition
to Professorial positions represented as many steps in this direction (Saith
2019). In parallel, the Keynesian front, never really united in the first
place, became increasingly fractious, as epitomized by the controversy
over the relationship between government budget deficits and external
balance between Kahn and M. Posner, on the one hand, and the New
Cambridge School represented by N. Kaldor and W. Godley, among oth-
ers, on the other (Kahn and Posner 1974, Shipman 2019).
Kahn’s levelled his at times bitter and biting polemic at both politicians
and trade unionists, guilty of “irresponsible” behaviour in not curbing the
rise in monetary wages, and at the new hegemonic theory—Monetarism—
which to all intents and purposes meant restoration of a pre-Keynesian
approach. Keynes, too, was accused of not having sufficiently foreseen
that, in economies that had experienced high levels of employment for
24 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
wage squeeze was negotiated in return for social policies acceptable to the
Trade Unions.
Those were the years when not only income policy but also full employ-
ment policy were disappearing as government objectives. When Margaret
Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979, for the first time since the war
the government did not declare full employment as an objective because,
according to its monetarist philosophy, it was not an objective that the
government could pursue directly through demand-support policies.
Rather, the objectives were to reduce public expenditure, taxation, public
sector needs and to re-establish market mechanisms. The latter would be
directed at indirectly fostering employment. By reducing the growth rate
of the money supply, the objective of reducing inflation would also be
achieved. To the refutation of the “mystique” of Monetarism and the con-
struction of an alternative institutional framework on Keynesian founda-
tions, Kahn would devote his efforts as a theoretical economist, academic
and member of the House of Lords for the rest of his life.
Conclusions
Kahn’s logical abilities were particularly acute in the sense that the math-
ematician, Felix Klein, distinguished “logicians” from “formalists” and
“intuitionists” to explain that “the main strength of the people who
belong to this class lies in their logical and critical abilities; in their ability
to give precise definitions and to derive from these strict deductions”.24
Unlike Keynes, who knew how to employ rhetoric as a persuasive tech-
nique, in Kahn deductive reasoning was always the chosen technique not
only for construction of the argument, but also for its defence. It was this
obsession with precision in the smallest details that probably prevented
Kahn from writing more extensively.
Joan Robinson, who possibly knew Kahn better than anyone else,
explained Kahn’s “perfectionism” in the preface written in 1976 for the
Italian edition of Kahn’s collected essays (Kahn 1972, 1976a): “He had
great repugnance to the thought that there might be an error attached to
his name” (JVR i/8/7). This is also the main reason why Kahn was
24
“‘Formalists’ are mathematicians who are exceptionally capable of formally working out
a given problem and finding the algorithm. Finally, ‘intuitionists’ are those who give special
importance to geometrical intuition … in all branches of mathematics” (Weintraub 1998,
pp. 1841–42).
26 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
you must not get into the habit of never doing your own work but always
someone else’s for them. In the first place you will get subconsciously (or
consciously) badly irked by it yourself and in the second place you will end
up by getting the credit for everything of any merit published by anyone
during your life-time!25
25
JMK to RFK, 13.8.1934, in RFK papers, 13/57/58.
1 INTRODUCTION 27
Price stability and balanced external accounts must be pursued using all
possible tools, but without resorting to austerity policies that depress
wages and consumption by raising the unemployment rate. Wage develop-
ments in relation to productivity are central in determining the link
between unemployment and inflation and must be governed by appropri-
ate institutions that foster dialogue and cooperation between the social
partners, while respecting the freedom of choice and autonomy of indi-
viduals and organizations.
Markets must operate freely, without forgetting that competition is not
perfect and that the financial markets are particularly exposed to destabi-
lizing speculation and herd behaviour. This calls for constant vigilance on
the part of the relevant authorities and a willingness to act promptly and
experiment with innovative regulatory measures, following the logic of
trial and error.
In defining growth and development strategies, it is essential to con-
sider the heterogeneity of the actors in the field, the power relations
between them, the conjectures that guide their actions, and the possibility
of governing those conjectures. This last aspect, perhaps the most impor-
tant, requires an adequate institutional context, discretion and speed of
execution in economic policy choices, as well as a constant effort of per-
suasion on the part of policymakers and economists in influencing public
opinion in the right direction. International cooperation is essential to
deal with global problems efficiently. This cooperation must allow for
more favourable treatment of the most disadvantaged nations and calls for
foresight on the part of the stronger nations and the ability to understand
that their own interest in the medium to long term is served by strongly
supporting the less favoured nations. The more successful international
cooperation is, the less need there will be for individual countries to resort
to drastic unilateral measures that are harmful to other countries and
counterproductive for those who introduced those measures in the
first place.
With this second volume of collected essays, we hope to have contrib-
uted to bringing to the attention of contemporary readers these ideas and
the man who defended them throughout his life, in academia and in the
institutions, Richard Ferdinand Kahn.
28 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
References
Carabelli, A. (2005). A lifelong friendship. The correspondence between Keynes
and Shove. In M. C. Marcuzzo and A. Rosselli (Eds.), Economists in Cambridge:
A study through their correspondence, 1907–1946 (pp. 196–215). Abingdon:
Routledge.
Chamberlin, E. H. (1961). The origin and early development of monopolistic
competition theory. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 515–543.
Cristiano, C. and Paesani, P. (2018a). Unconventional monetary policy ante lit-
teram: Richard Kahn and the monetary policy debate during the works of the
Radcliffe Committee. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 42(4), 1145–1164.
Cristiano, C. and Paesani, P. (2018b). Price stability and the origins and early
influence of the Phillips curve on British policy debates. History of Political
Economy, 50(3), 483–509.
Cristiano, C. and Paesani, P. (2018c). Monetary policy and price stability in British
post-war debate: restatement of evidence from economists’ papers presented to
the Radcliffe Committee. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought,
25(6), 1311–1341.
Dawkins, P. J. (1980). Incomes policy. In W. P. J. Maunder (Ed.), The British
Economy in the 1970s. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Dunlop, J. T. (1938). The movement of real and money wages. Economic Journal,
48(191), 413–434.
Dunlop, J. T. (1939). Price flexibility and the degree of monopoly. Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 53(4), 522–534.
Fantacci, L., Marcuzzo, M. C., Rosselli, A. and Sanfilippo, E. (2012). Speculation
and buffer stocks: The legacy of Keynes and Kahn. European Journal of the
History of Economic Thought, 19(3), 453–473.
Fellner, W. J., Gilbert, M., Hansen, B., Kahn, R. F., Lutz, F. and Wolff, P. de
(1961). The Problem of Rising Prices. Paris: Organisation for European
Economic Co-operation.
Hall, R. L. and Hitch, C. J. (1939). Price theory and business behaviour. Oxford
Economic Papers, 2 (May), 12–45.
Kahn, R. F. (1931). The relation of home investment to employment. Economic
Journal, 41(161), 173–198.
Kahn, R. F. (1933). Imperfect competition and the marginal principle. Published
as Chap. 2 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1937). The problem of duopoly. Economic Journal, 47(185), March,
1–20. Reprinted as Chap. 3 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1952a). Oxford studies in the price mechanism. Economic Journal,
62(245), March, 119–130. Reprinted as Chap. 4 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1952b). International regulation of trade and exchanges. In Banking
and Foreign Trade (pp. 1–18), Lectures delivered at the Fifth International
1 INTRODUCTION 29
Banking Summer School, Oxford, July. London: Europa Publications for the
Institute of Bankers. Reprinted as Chap. 8 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1954). Some notes on liquidity preference. Manchester School of
Economics and Social Studies, 22(3), 229–257. Reprinted in R. F. Kahn (1972),
Selected Essays on Employment and Growth (pp. 72–96). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kahn, R. F. ([1958] 1972). Memorandum submitted to the Radcliffe Committee
on the Working of the Monetary System, May 27. In R. F. Kahn (1972),
Selected Essays on Employment and Growth (pp. 124–152). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kahn, R. F. (1972). Selected Essays on Employment and Growth. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kahn, R. F. (1973). The International Monetary System, American Economic
Review, 63(2), 181–188. Reprinted as Chap. 9 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1976a). L’occupazione e la crescita. Turin: Einaudi.
Kahn, R. F. (1976b). Historical origins of the International Monetary Fund. In
A.P. Thirlwall (ed.), Keynes and International Monetary Relations (pp. 3–35).
London: Macmillan. Reprinted as Chap. 10 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1976c). Unemployment as seen by the Keynesians. In G.D.N. Worswick
(Ed.), The Concept and Measurement of Involuntary Unemployment (pp. 19–33).
London: Allen and Unwin. Reprinted as Chap. 11 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1976d). Thoughts on the behaviour of wages and monetarism. Lloyds
Bank Review, 119, January, 1–11. Reprinted as Chap. 12 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1978). Some aspects of the development of Keynes’s thought. Journal
of Economic Literature, 16(2), 544–559. Reprinted as Chap. 6 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1983). L’economia del breve periodo. M. Dardi (Ed.). Turin:
Boringhieri.
Kahn, R. F. (1984a). The Making of Keynes’ General Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kahn, R. F. (1984b). ‘The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money’
(Fifth Raffaele Mattioli Lecture). In R. F. Kahn, The Making of Keynes’s General
Theory (pp. 119–168). Reprinted as Chap. 7 in this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1985). The Cambridge ‘Circus’. In G. Harcourt (ed.), Keynes and
His Contemporaries (pp. 42–51). London: Macmillan. Reprinted as Chap. 5 in
this volume.
Kahn, R. F. (1989). The Economics of the Short Period. London: Macmillan.
Kahn, R. F. (1999). Concorrenza, occupazione e moneta. M. C. Marcuzzo (Transl.
and Ed.). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Kahn, R. F. and Posner, M. (1974, April 17). Challenging the “elegant and strik-
ing” paradoxes of the New School. The Times, p. 19.
30 M. C. MARCUZZO AND P. PAESANI
Imperfect Competition
CHAPTER 2
Richard F. Kahn
I
So long as the economist had to think of the conditions of demand in
terms of price and elasticity, it was difficult to advance the theory of value
very far beyond the realm of perfect competition. The maximisation of
monopoly net revenue provides but a clumsy tool. Marshall himself must
have been well aware of the inadequacy of the construction with which it
is usual to associate his name. For in advocating the use of a series of rect-
angular hyperbolas “made on thin paper”, he had to admit that “a careful
study of the shapes thus obtained [by drawing diagrams to represent vari-
ous conditions of demand and of monopoly supply] will give more assis-
tance than any elaborate course of reasoning in the endeavour to realise
the multiform action of economic forces in relation to monopolies”.1 It is
only recently that the study of monopoly has ceased to be an experimental
1
Principles, p. 483 note.
R. F. Kahn
2
So far as I can discover, priority is to be attributed to Professor Yntema of the University
of Chicago (see Journal of Political Economy, December 1928, p. 687). In Harvard the
marginal revenue curve was discovered by Professor Chamberlin (The Theory of Monopolistic
Competition, p. 14), by Mr. A. Smithies, of Magdalene College, Oxford, (in an unpublished
essay) and, for use at the Harvard Business School, by Professor Philip Cabot and Professor
R.S. Meeriam. In Cambridge, England, the idea was introduced independently, in unpub-
lished essays, by Mr. C.H.P. Gifford, of Magdalene College, who was at that time an under-
graduate, and by Mr. P.A. Sloan, of Clare College. The term marginal revenue was devised
for their conceptions by Mr. Robinson, and it was only on the publication of Professor
Viner’s article (Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, September 1937) that it was realised that,
by a coincidence, precisely the same term was in use at Chicago. At Oxford it was Mr. Harrod
who invented the curve, again under a different name (Economic Journal, June 1930,
p. 238), while mention should also be made of professor Mehta of the University of Allahabad
(The Elements of Economics Mathematically Interpreted, p. 252) and of Dr. Schneider of
the University of Bonn (Reine Theorie monopolistischer Wirtschaftsformen, p. 14), and
probably of several others. The marginal revenue curve forms the basis of Mrs. Robinson’s
forthcoming book on The Economics of Imperfect Competition, and the substance of this
paper is largely derived from her hitherto unpublished work. Professor Chamberlin’s treat-
ment of the same subject was not yet available at the time that the paper was prepared.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
— Je vais montrer mon costume à mon père.
Je la suivis dans la galerie et je descendis lentement l’escalier.
O Seigneur, si tu existes quelque part, garde l’homme de cette
puissance irrésistible qui le pousse à la possession de son
semblable féminin. Garde-le du parfum que dégagent les chevelures
et le mouvement des bras et qui est plus enivrant que tous les
alcools.
Délivre-le du goût de saisir les corps, de les serrer et d’y poser
les dents comme font les bêtes fauves, car ce goût est plus
dominateur dans l’âme que les sages conseils d’un père et le devoir
d’agir avec délicatesse qu’on s’est imposé par la raison.
O Seigneur, garde l’homme de la teinte bleuâtre de la peau,
source de souffrance, de la courbe délicate du cou, chemin du
malheur, de la ligne fuyante des lèvres, cause de calamités.
LE TIGRE HUMAIN